Jump to content

Just My thought about the game


Recommended Posts

Hi !!

I have played almost all of the strategic games there are. Third Reich, Panzer General Series, allied general etc, Storm Across europe (dos)

clash of steel (2 versions) and a lot of other (gary brigsby and pacific war one floppy disc)but i name these since they are most similar to SC: European theater.

In all of these games if you play against AI, it will more or less suck. The games that i find has the best AI is from SSI and their panzer general II or allied general. One thing that i liked with PG 2(panzer general 2) is the ability to fire and then move.

I know that panzer general and this game are 2 different games. One is strategic (sc) and PG2 is more of a tactical game.

They could have incorperated more options into SC.

1. Move and then fire or fire and then move.

2. More politics option with influences like in clash of steel.

3. Make more supply option like fuel and ammunition limits so it can be more complexed than what it is now.

4. An option with limited purchases of certain troops like it doesnt matter how much "cash" you have. You still cant buy certain stuff. So its more historical for people who want that.

5. The supply lines in this game are out of belief.

Especially the re-enforcement when supply lines are broken or city is under siege the opponent.

Just take malta under siege where does the units come from ?

6. Land lease from USA ? Well there are some points from usa to UK but what about landlease to Russia ?

7. Build fortifications ?

Well now to the positive of SC :

No lockups or freezes sofar.

Game graphics are not bad.

When the tcp/ip patch is being release then I the game will increase in playability since playing versus the AI suck. I just hope they will have a good place for all players to meet online to set up the games. Then this game will be really fun.

The editor is a must but all other games seem to have that as well.

The R&D options is good in the game.

TO sum it up:

Worth buying and playing against other "Humans"

What I still wait for ?

A world wide in depth strategic and tactical game where the manual is soooooooo thick and the game is soooooooooo complexed. Maybe thats an UTOPIA but there is one game called the world in flames that was build from third reich that was suppose to be global instead from som aussie game group but they said that it should be released last year but sofar no new news.

Well i probably forgot a lot but they more i test this game (SC) i will find more stuff to write here about.

[ August 08, 2002, 12:45 AM: Message edited by: cadillact ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with World in Flames is that it isn't fun. It's more work than game. The beta of the computer game is a faithful reproduction but I shudder to think of someone who doesn't know the rules inside and out trying to play it.

And it's ugly.

Strategic Command, on the other hand, is perfectly comprehensible, straightforward and it should include paratroopers so that players can say, "What if there was a major change in military thinking to implement airborne infantry at the army level", whoa, oops, kind of got a little off topic.

And add Japan (It could be called, Strategic Command, The Northern Hemispherical War). Oh, there I go again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points on the PG II game...in my case, it was more like years and hours of addiction:)

PG II had that rare quality in a game that combines tactical (the 40+ scenarios in a campaign) as well as the strategic (what you build, when you build, and how you depoy). What I liked about PG II was the PG II community (re: Builders Paradise and Strategy Planet) where there was always a ton of downloads, patches and upgrades (not to mention many new campaigns) that always kept the game new and exciting. My point is this: based on the early rave reviews of SC, I hope there becomes a community with upgrades, patches, alternate campaigns, etc... to keep SC a challenge. I know I'll certainly contribute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well SC is easy to play compare to other games and that will make it easy to start and understand the game.

To augustus:

Well i have not played PG 2 in a long time since i reformated my HD some time ago. I played the scenarios that was available at that time and the patches that existed. Maybe it time to do an install again and play it again. On the other hand there are so many new games coming out all the time that might get a first shoot. I didnt like PG 3 since its not for the graphic and 3d that i play a strategy game. I just hope that they dont promise too much with the tcp/ip patch to SC. I have seen this before and then the patch or update never came to life. Just hope that they can deliver within a resonable time.

I have a policy that i dont test beta games(unless i get paid to do it) so for world in flames beta i dont know how complex and ugly it is. And why you might ask I used to download betas but it was too much of frustrations of lockups and then see the problem was uncorrected with the retail version.

I think sofar that PG2 is better than SC since the setup 5 campaigns feels already limited and doing your own campaigns feels a huge waste of time since the AI is dumb as a nut. Maybe because the map are the same all the time compare to PG2 where it change all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Create New...